Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Object personification in autism: This paper will be sad if you don't read (2018)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 116 posts

Re: Object personification in autism: This paper will be sad if you don't read (2018)

#71

Post by a_cardboard_box »

seabird wrote: post #46
earnestinger wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lot of languages assign gender to objects. One should control for foreign language knowledge.

A lot of languages assign nouns to a noun class. They are (usually) not ascribing a biological gender to an object. "Gender" is a horrendously bad name for the concept.

"Gender" referred only to grammar before it gained its modern meaning. The modern meaning was introduced in the 1950s/60s to differentiate social aspects (gender) from biological (sex). Of course people then started using it to just mean "sex", but if you use social definition I don't think it's a bad name for the concept.

Re: Object personification in autism: This paper will be sad if you don't read (2018)

#72

Post by tudorw »

sctb wrote: post #8

I don't have access to the full text, but based on the abstract I think it's likely that I relate to this phenomenon (I am autistic). My experience is not so much the attribution of human characteristics to non-human objects, but I understand why this might be the only accessible language of expression. For me, if a useful object is damaged or otherwise loses its usefulness through neglect or malice, I experience som…

Are you familiar with Shinto, you might enjoy the perspective.

Re: Object personification in autism: This paper will be sad if you don't read (2018)

#73

Post by anonymars »

j4coh wrote: post #5

I always thought this was something I got from watching The Brave Little Toaster and similar content when I was tiny.

I can't take this kind of pressure

I must confess one more dusty road

Would be just a road too long

Worthless

IYKYK. A few touches:

- "I just can't / I just can't / I just can't seem to get started" mimics a car trying to turn over

- Pairing the wedding and the funeral

Re: Object personification in autism: This paper will be sad if you don't read (2018)

#74

Post by d_burfoot »

I feel a very deep, apparently irrational reluctance to throw away objects I no longer need, especially if those objects are well-crafted. I feel that doing so is disrespectful of the love and effort the object's creator invested in them.

Re: Object personification in autism: This paper will be sad if you don't read (2018)

#75

Post by neilv »

Something I've wondered that's maybe related: How many people "feel" systems?

Like, if you're designing, building, or managing a large and complex system, and there are concerns in different aspects of it, and you have maybe a kind of emotional coprocessor about it, e.g., keeping track of all the parts that bother you, and how much they bother you? (Also, parts that you like.)

I'm pretty sure that not all people have nearly the same capacity for this, but I don't know the distribution.

Re: Object personification in autism: This paper will be sad if you don't read (2018)

#76

Post by QuantumGood »

sctb wrote: post #8

I don't have access to the full text, but based on the abstract I think it's likely that I relate to this phenomenon (I am autistic). My experience is not so much the attribution of human characteristics to non-human objects, but I understand why this might be the only accessible language of expression. For me, if a useful object is damaged or otherwise loses its usefulness through neglect or malice, I experience som…

I remember in the 1990's when I felt very strongly that in chess, rook pawns could be advanced far more often than they were in Grandmaster games. And in recent years modern computers confirm that (it has been called "the rook pawn revolution"). Looking back on it a bit later, I realized I had no logical, left-brain systems support for it, only one of the strongest "systems" feelings I can remember ever having. I also grew up on the spectrum, with a side of moderately severe anxiety disorder, and extreme difficulty sleeping.

Re: Object personification in autism: This paper will be sad if you don't read (2018)

#77

Post by leksak »

neilv wrote: post #75

Something I've wondered that's maybe related: How many people "feel" systems? Like, if you're designing, building, or managing a large and complex system, and there are concerns in different aspects of it, and you have maybe a kind of emotional coprocessor about it, e.g., keeping track of all the parts that bother you, and how much they bother you? (Also, parts that you like.) I'm pretty sure that not all people have…

Decidedly relatable to me to the point where I have a custom field on our ClickUps called ” Pain ” at my work

Re: Object personification in autism: This paper will be sad if you don't read (2018)

#78

Post by kgwgk »

hildolfr wrote: post #55
drivingmenuts wrote: post #42

"Normal people" do it, too - ask a sailor about ship. Some people name and gender their vehicles. To a certain extent, it comes from close association with object. I'm the guy who drives around with a cartoon drawing of a robot in his car that will utterly destroy anyone who tries to steal it, so I ought to know.

Sailors, at least the ones I know, are often superstitious because 1) marine tradition is filled with legends and beliefs 2) the sea is cruel and unforgiving. No one wants to be sinking while remembering that they forgot to christen the boat , they just killed a seabird, and they stepped onto the boat with their left foot. My point: I see marine superstition as a cultural affect rather than a sign of any such other p…

the sea is [a] cruel and unforgiving [mistress]

Re: Object personification in autism: This paper will be sad if you don't read (2018)

#79

Post by moffkalast »

sctb wrote: post #8

I don't have access to the full text, but based on the abstract I think it's likely that I relate to this phenomenon (I am autistic). My experience is not so much the attribution of human characteristics to non-human objects, but I understand why this might be the only accessible language of expression. For me, if a useful object is damaged or otherwise loses its usefulness through neglect or malice, I experience som…

This doesn't sound exclusive to autistic people to me at all, more like normal human behaviour. Though I would imagine the average person is more likely to get angry about the dull knife for wasting their time.

Re: Object personification in autism: This paper will be sad if you don't read (2018)

#80

Post by gwbas1c »

neilv wrote: post #75

Something I've wondered that's maybe related: How many people "feel" systems? Like, if you're designing, building, or managing a large and complex system, and there are concerns in different aspects of it, and you have maybe a kind of emotional coprocessor about it, e.g., keeping track of all the parts that bother you, and how much they bother you? (Also, parts that you like.) I'm pretty sure that not all people have…

About half of my time spent coding is making the code "feel good."

It's really important, too. That's how the code becomes maintainable for the next person.

Post reply on HN